Deterrence-based trust, a fundamental element in interpersonal relationships, is characterized by the belief that rules, laws, or consequences are in place to prevent one individual from exploiting or harming another (Lewicki et al., 2016). This type of trust is rooted in the expectation that individuals will act in a trustworthy manner due to the fear of negative repercussions if they violate the trust (Conley, 2012).
Key Facts
- Definition: Deterrence-based trust is based on the belief that there are rules, laws, or consequences in place that prevent one person from taking advantage of or harming another person.
- Cost-Benefit Analysis: Individuals trust others based on their assessment of the potential costs and benefits of being trustworthy or untrustworthy.
- Fragility: Deterrence-based trust is considered the most fragile type of trust because it relies on the fear of reprisal if trust is violated.
- Limited Experience: Deterrence-based trust may be extended to someone with whom there is limited experience or history of interaction.
- Context: Deterrence-based trust can exist in various contexts, including personal, professional, family, and social relationships.
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Individuals engage in a cost-benefit analysis when assessing whether to trust someone. They weigh the potential benefits of trusting the other person against the potential costs of being betrayed (Lewicki et al., 2016). If the perceived benefits outweigh the perceived costs, individuals are more likely to extend deterrence-based trust.
Fragility
Deterrence-based trust is considered the most fragile type of trust due to its reliance on the fear of reprisal (Conley, 2012). This type of trust can be easily broken if individuals perceive that the rules, laws, or consequences are not enforced or if they believe that the other person is willing to take the risk of violating the trust despite the potential consequences.
Limited Experience
Deterrence-based trust is often extended to individuals with whom there is limited experience or history of interaction (Conley, 2012). This can occur in various contexts, including personal, professional, family, and social relationships. For example, a new employee may initially extend deterrence-based trust to their manager due to the lack of prior experience working together.
Contextual Factors
The existence of deterrence-based trust can vary depending on the context of the relationship. In some contexts, such as professional settings, deterrence-based trust may be more prevalent due to the presence of formal rules and regulations that govern behavior. In other contexts, such as personal relationships, deterrence-based trust may be less prevalent as individuals rely more on emotional connections and shared values to build trust.
Conclusion
Deterrence-based trust, while fragile, serves as a foundation for trust in various relationships. It is rooted in the belief that rules, laws, or consequences will prevent individuals from exploiting or harming others. This type of trust can be strengthened by consistently upholding the rules and consequences, thereby fostering a culture of trustworthiness and reliability.
References
Conley, R. (2012). Three Levels of Trust – Where Do Your Relationships Stand? [Blog post]. Blanchard LeaderChat. https://leaderchat.org/2012/10/25/three-levels-of-trust-where-do-your-relationships-stand/
Lewicki, R. J., McAllister, D. J., & Bies, R. J. (2016). Trust and distrust: New relationships and realities. Academy of Management Review, 41(4), 559-587. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2016.1254093
FAQs
What is deterrence-based trust?
Deterrence-based trust is a type of trust that is based on the belief that rules, laws, or consequences are in place to prevent one person from taking advantage of or harming another person.
Why is deterrence-based trust considered fragile?
Deterrence-based trust is considered fragile because it relies on the fear of reprisal if trust is violated. If individuals perceive that the rules, laws, or consequences are not enforced or if they believe that the other person is willing to take the risk of violating the trust despite the potential consequences, this type of trust can be easily broken.
In what contexts does deterrence-based trust exist?
Deterrence-based trust can exist in various contexts, including personal, professional, family, and social relationships. It is often extended to individuals with whom there is limited experience or history of interaction.
How can deterrence-based trust be strengthened?
Deterrence-based trust can be strengthened by consistently upholding the rules and consequences that govern the relationship. This fosters a culture of trustworthiness and reliability, which encourages individuals to behave in a trustworthy manner.
What are some examples of deterrence-based trust in the workplace?
Examples of deterrence-based trust in the workplace include:
- Employees trusting their manager to fairly evaluate their performance and provide constructive feedback.
- Coworkers trusting each other to complete their assigned tasks on time and to a high standard.
- Customers trusting a company to deliver quality products or services and to handle their personal information responsibly.
How does deterrence-based trust differ from other types of trust?
Deterrence-based trust differs from other types of trust, such as knowledge-based trust and identification-based trust, in that it is based on fear of reprisal rather than positive expectations or emotional connections.
Can deterrence-based trust coexist with other types of trust?
Yes, deterrence-based trust can coexist with other types of trust. For example, in a professional relationship, individuals may have deterrence-based trust in each other due to the presence of formal rules and regulations. However, they may also develop knowledge-based trust over time as they gain more experience working together and come to understand each other’s strengths and weaknesses.
What are the limitations of deterrence-based trust?
Deterrence-based trust can be limited in situations where the rules, laws, or consequences are not clear or are not enforced consistently. Additionally, this type of trust may not be sufficient to foster high levels of cooperation and collaboration, which are essential for success in many endeavors.